Share this Article

In April this year, something remarkable happened: Several large governmental agencies got together and proposed a set of voluntary marketing guidelines food manufacturers should follow to curb childhood obesity. They say it threatens their right of free speech.

FDA + USDA + FTC + CDC = IWG

That the Federal Drug Administration, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Federal Trade Commission and the Centers for Disease Control made a joint effort and formed the Interagency Working Group (IWG) to formulate these guidelines is by itself remarkable, given the friction that usually exists between large governmental bodies.

Even more remarkable is that what they came up with to fight childhood obesity makes quite a bit of sense. In essence, it comes down to

limiting the amounts of fat, sodium and simple carbohydrates in foods marketed to children

setting minimum values for healthy nutrients like whole grains, fruits, vegetables etc. they have to contain

In formal comments filed with the Commission, WLF argued that the FTC needs to understand that when it issues “guidance” to regulated industries regarding what they should be saying in their food advertising, in no meaningful sense of the word can its speech restrictions be deemed “voluntary.” WLF noted that the FTC has made clear that it expects the Guidance to result in significant changes in the content of food advertising. Under those circumstances, the Guidance quite clearly burdens speech and thus is subject to First Amendment limitations, WLF argued.

But, although the WLF tries to blur it, there is an important difference between voluntary guidelines and a law that is to be passed: the former you are free to follow if you choose to, adherence to the latter is mandatory. Which is also the conclusion a group of 36 highly respectable law professors came to in an open letter to the IWG (PDF):

The Free Speech Clause applies only to government mandates restricting or compelling private speech. The draft nutrition principles, which are designed “to guide industry self-regulatory efforts,” do not restrain or compel anyone’s speech. They are not, in fact, government regulation at all. Instead, they are the speech of the government itself.

The U.S. Government Admits Defeat

So all is well? No, the lobbying blitz that went on ever since April, ensured that the US government finally gave in. Never underestimate the power of a good lobbying effort – or how much legislation is affected by it.

An example for a food that might not qualify for the proposed guidelines

In that light it is interesting to note that the IWG admitted defeat in a response to an inquiry from House of Representatives member Fred Upton. Because coincidentally Upton had some questionable involvement with campaign financing handouts from the oil industry, and the scale of that operation may shine a general light on how far various industries will go in their lobbying efforts.

Your email notes that we have lobbied against the Interagency Working Group (IWG) proposal. That is correct. We have serious concerns about the IWG proposal.

The Food Industry Is Scared Of You

What is the food industry afraid of, to go through efforts these massive? Guidelines it isn’t even required to follow? Highly unlikely.

In my opinion it’s public pressure – as soon as some companies respect these guidelines, they can become a very effective marketing tool, potentially giving new, smaller and more quality-minded players more market leverage. The behemoths ignoring the guidelines could stand out negatively.

It therefore is time for you to take action. Let the food industry know that this won’t do. Getting your concerns voiced to the right people is just a click away.

that may be so, but i don’t agree with your solution. if parents don’t know much about nutrition we should educate them, not enforce some bureaucrats who (supposedly) know better to come into my family and tell me how to be a good parent. or else…
i mean if you trust people to procreate and have kids you have to trust them all the way. you can’t say that they are good when they make kids, but too dumb to raise them, we need bureaucrats to come in to do that.

the difference is that is one thing to tell me what you think is right (don’t take it personally, but things change in time and what is right today can be wrong tomorrow) and then I choose whether to listen to you or not, and another thing to impose me to do a thing.